Skip to main content



Five types of book reviews

Over the last few months, I've taken over as Book Review Editor at Philosophy East & West, and, in addition to working to find reviewers, I've aimed to set up a streamlined process which anyone stepping into the role after me can use. One of the things I've been working on is a guide for book reviewers. In addition to the scheduling aspect (what to expect and when), the document aims to convey a sense of review expectations. But how to do this succinctly, without stepping on reviewers' own personal styles?
In trying to answer this question, I found a helpful comment thread on Daily Nous where Shane Ralston referred to Philosophy in Review's style guide. I followed his advice there and revised the set of five reviewer types to be five review types. After all, I (unfortunately) recognize myself in each of these reviews, to an extent, depending on the review. Hopefully my reviews have had enough of the good review in them to not be entirely categorized in the other…

Latest Posts

I had a joke...

A Personal Post: On Academic Kindness in Difficult Times

On titles in Sanskrit philosophy

Materials for Teaching (Introduction to) Indian Philosophy